Montana Logging Collaborative Fails Restoration Goals

- by George Wuerth­n­er, March 15, 2015, The Wildlife News

The For­est Ser­vice (FS), the tim­ber indus­try and some envi­ron­men­tal groups formed a col­lab­o­ra­tive groups sev­er­al years ago known as the South­west Crown of the Con­ti­nent (SWCC). The goal osten­si­bly is to pro­mote healthy ecosys­tems, but the real goal is to increase log­ging in the See­ley-Swan and Lin­coln areas. The SWCC “restora­tion” objec­tives appear to be in direct con­flict with sound sci­ence and well estab­lished principles.

The col­lab­o­ra­tive first mis­in­ter­prets eco­log­i­cal para­me­ters to cre­ate a prob­lem that they can solve with log­ging. Then the log­ging cre­ates extra prob­lems like spread of weeds on log­ging roads, which in turn requires more man­age­ment. It is a self-ful­fill­ing man­age­ment that dam­ages our for­est ecosys­tems, and wastes tax pay­er mon­ey to sub­si­dize pri­vate tim­ber interests.

The For­est Land­scape Restora­tion (CFLR) pro­gram sup­port­ed by the SWCC col­lab­o­ra­tive has the fol­low­ing goals.

Reduce the risk of unchar­ac­ter­is­tic wildfire

Improve fish and wildlife habitat

Main­tain or improve water qual­i­ty and water­shed function

Main­tain, decom­mis­sion, and reha­bil­i­tate roads and trails

Pre­vent or con­trol inva­sions of exot­ic species, and

Use woody bio­mass and small-diam­e­ter trees pro­duced from restora­tion projects.

Unfor­tu­nate­ly this is not “restora­tion” rather it is degradation.

The first goal to cut risk of “unchar­ac­ter­is­tic wild­fire demon­strates a fail­ure to under­stand wild­fire ecol­o­gy. . There are  no unchar­ac­ter­is­tic wild­fires occur­ring in the SWCC. The bulk of this area con­sists of forests like lodge­pole pine, sub­alpine fir, west­ern larch and so forth that nat­u­ral­ly burn as mixed to high sever­i­ty fires. They burn in large fires when­ev­er there is drought cou­pled with warm tem­per­a­tures, low humid­i­ty and high winds—assuming an igni­tion. That is the way these forests replace them­selves. There is noth­ing unusu­al about any of the fires that have burned and will burn in this area.

Then the sec­ond objec­tive is “improve fish and wildlife habi­tat”. Iron­i­cal­ly large severe wild­fire fire is one of the major fac­tors that cre­ates dead wood. Dead wood is crit­i­cal to many wildlife species. Fires also cre­ate the patchy age for­est stands that is impor­tant for many wildlife species. Fires are even impor­tant for aquat­ic ecosys­tems.  Dead wood in streams is impor­tant for bull trout and oth­er fish. Fire pro­motes the young forests that snow­shoe hares like–hence also lynx. Etc. So if the FS reduces the “risk” of wildfire–especially large fires, it is harm­ing wildlife and fish habitat.

Next we come to main­tain or improve water qual­i­ty and water­shed func­tion. Again this is a good goal, but when you put in a bunch of roads and dis­turb the for­est floor with log­ging equip­ment you are not improv­ing water qual­i­ty. Even tem­po­rary roads can cause sig­nif­i­cant run-off of sed­i­ment. Cut­ting of the sub-sur­face water flow by road con­struc­tion can also cause more sur­face flow lead­ing to greater ero­sion and sed­i­men­ta­tion in streams. So “treat­ing” the forests here auto­mat­i­cal­ly degrades the water.

Of course, one of the jus­ti­fi­ca­tions I hear all the time for log­ging is that after cut­ting the trees the FS will close roads. Yet one doesn’t have to cre­ate log­ging roads, so you can close them, nor do you need to cut trees to close roads. If exist­ing roads are caus­ing prob­lems for water qual­i­ty or wildlife than the FS legal­ly should close them, and they don’t need to log to do this.

Anoth­er goal is to pre­vent and con­trol inva­sions of exot­ic species. A very laud­able goal. But the biggest fac­tor in the spread of weeds is dis­tur­bance from log­ging roads and equip­ment. So in treat­ing the for­est, you cre­ate the prob­lem you need to solve. This is great for cre­at­ing an end­less job for the FS but it’s not in the pub­lic interest.

Final­ly the last objec­tive is to use woody bio­mass from “restora­tion” projects. This last aim acts as if bio­mass is some­how unnec­es­sary for for­est ecosys­tem func­tion. Noth­ing could be fur­ther from the truth. The removal of bio­mass harms for­est ecosys­tems, nutri­ent cycling, wildlife habi­tat, etc. There is a defi­cien­cy of dead wood in many of our forest­ed land­scapes, par­tic­u­lar­ly the heav­i­ly logged See­ley Swan Valley.

In short, the SWCC is clear­ly not using good sci­ence, and ignor­ing the mul­ti­ple ways that log­ging harms the envi­ron­ment. Fur­ther­more, since near­ly all tim­ber sales are mon­ey losers, this pol­i­cy just fos­ter greater depen­den­cy by com­mu­ni­ties and indus­try on gov­ern­ment largess or wel­fare. It’s time to wean the Mon­tana tim­ber indus­try off of the gov­ern­ment teat.


Posted

in

by


EJ Communities Map

Map of Coal and Gas Facilities

We are mapping all of the existing, proposed, closed and defeated dirty energy and waste facilities in the US. We are building a network of community groups to fight the facilities and the corporations behind them.

Our Network

Watch Us on YouTube